Tag: Republicans

It’s not worth it…

I recently had a discussion with a fellow traveler in the “limited government” movement on Facebook about a particular aspect of the upcoming battle for the White House in 2012.President Obama boarding Air Force One

We should face this topic head on, because I think it strikes at the core, the heart, the essence, the raison d’etre of the Conservative movement and why we should think about things critically, not just politically, but philosophically and indeed pragmatically.

The particular aspect that I’m referring to is the concept of: “Anyone but Obama”

First, let me say that, as everyone knows, I’m not a fan of Obama.  I feel that in his policies, his stances, his beliefs, and his actions he represents everything in the area of public administration and Government that I stand against, and the mere fact that he’s in the White House believing what he believes should leave all of us with restless nights.

Second, since I haven’t posted on it explicitly it may or may not be surprising that I am very underwhelmed (not overwhelmed, and not even…whelmed) by the current field of candidates rounding out the GOP field of 2012 contenders.  My hope was that Daniels would get into the race so at least we’d see the POSSIBILITY of the right kind of candidate (and no, the fact that Bush likes him does not automatically cause me to dislike him), even though I was not thoroughly convinced that when it came platform plank and debate time that he would have fulfilled all of my dreamy expectations…the potential was there.

Nevertheless, the conversation with my friend started with this basic premise put forth by her:

“I don’t care who the GOP puts forth; as long as they can beat Obama.”

To cut to the chase, when we got more specific, Newt Gingrich was brought up as a shining example (by me) of THE most Progressive Republican in the field, and she would STILL support him.

My question…why?

Because he wouldn’t put Communists in the administration.

OK…so what? So that he could put people who AREN’T communists but still push big government policies in the administration.

Well it’ll give us some time to regroup and at least “live”?

Live? So the communists are going to kill us if we have Obama for four more years? Live for what? Live with the knowledge that a) half the limited government movement is going to go back to sleep, and b) the other half is going to have to fight people who AREN’T obvious communists when they continue to overreach their Constitutional boundaries?

And what are we fighting for anyway? Are we fighting for a “kinder gentler” Toquevillian type of tyranny, or are we fighting to finally rid ourselves of tyranny.  All you have to do is ask yourself this:

If you look forward 20 years from now, which situation would have been worse: Barack Obama being president for 8 years, or Newt Gingrich being President for 8 years, followed by some other nimby pamby Progressive (from either party) being President for another 8.

Because let me tell you…if Barack Obama is President for 8 years, this country will be BEGGING for some SERIOUS damn “change”.

This is not a battle that will be won in November of 2012; it will be won EVERY DAY for the next 20 years.  That battle will be EVEN HARDER with a Progressive Republican in the White House than it is with Obama in the White House.  It will be much easier to fight it with an administration that continues to overstep and misstep and is being fought tooth and nail by States that are turning increasingly against him.  Half those battle will STOP with a Republican in the White House (for a variety of very obvious reasons), so we BETTER make sure if we’re going to put an “R” in there, it’s the right guy.

Now all that being said, I DO believe we can replace Obama with someone who will fight for limited Government.  I DO believe it would be PREFERABLE for Obama to be defeated after his first term so that stories cannot be invented about his legacy (Noone pretends that Jimmy Carter was some great savior, but they can pretend that Clinton was…why? Because he won his second term. People like winners.)  So make no mistake, I want Obama defeated. But he HAS to be defeated by limited government ideas, not “compassionate conservatism”…or our Republic may be lost forever.

Don’t give up.

Are Republicans living up to their Responsibility?

Great question!

And the answer is…um…NO!

From PJTV.

What wonder 5 months has done for the RSC (Republican Study Committee)

Contrast this:

http://rsc.jordan.house.gov/Upload…ending_Reduction_Act–TWOPAGER.pdf

with this:

http://rsc.jordan.house.gov/Upload….onest_Solutions_2_Pager_FINAL.pdf

I’ll give you a hint. The first was from January, where the Republican Study Committee managed to find 2.5 trillion dollars to save from the Federal Deficit over 10 years. The second was from this week which BALANCES THE BUDGET in ten years (haven’t calculated how much of a difference that is in deficit spending, but it’s a lot).

The REAL question is…what happened? Could it be that EVERYONE KNOWS THEY’VE BEEN SOLD A BILL OF GOODS BY THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP AND THE RSC IS STRUGGLING TO SAVE THEM?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/cbo-budget-deal-cuts-this-fiscal-years-deficit-by-just-353-million-not-38-billion-touted/2011/04/13/AFFJnkWD_story.html

That’s my guess…

An open letter to the Maine Republican Party

To whom it may concern:

Now you have two (that’s two out of two) Senators who apparently get out of bed every morning and make a conscious decision that above all else they will be “Moderate” first, Republican second, and Conservative–dead last.

We’ve known this about Senator Snowe for quite a while, but maybe Senator Collins is a new convert to the “don’t think, just be moderate” wing of the Republican Party.

Please ask your Senators to clearly lay out either a) what they were offered by Senator Reid that was so tempting as to “reach across the aisle” and pass YET ANOTHER crap sandwich “stimulus” bill, or b) where is the gaping hole in their lives that has to be filled by abandoning reason in order to appear…”bi-partisan.”

Sincerely,

LogiPundit

VA delegation on the Bailout Plan

Just so everyone knows the score.  Our Virginia delegation voted against the bailout plan 6 to 5:

Virginia’s congressional delegation was sharply divided, with six voting against the package and five in favor. Bobby Scott was the only Virginia Democrat voting against the bill. He joined Republicans Robert Wittman, Thelma Drake, Randy Forbes, Virginia Goode and Robert Goodlatte.

Voting for the legislation were Republicans Eric Cantor, Frank Wolf and Tom Davis, and Democrats Jim Moran and Rick Boucher.

If I recall correctly, Eric Cantor was one of the Republicans front and center really pushing this thing.

But since my Representative is Frank Wolf, that’s who has some explaining to do to me (OK, not me in particular, but his constituents in general).  And check THIS out.  His former primary opponent, Vern McKinley (whom Mr. Wolf trounced 9 to 1), reportedly warned about Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae more than 10 years ago:

“Although Freddie and Fannie are privately owned, they are what is known as government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). GSEs don’t have to follow all the rules that true privately owned companies do: they don’t have to register their securities with the government, their securities receive special treatment for investment purposes, they don’t have to pay state and local income taxes and–most important–their government sponsorship gives them the aura of a fully guaranteed government entity. That final benefit means they save billions in borrowing costs, just as lenders are willing to offer low-interest student loans that are guaranteed by the government. That savings alone allows the GSEs to pocket about $2 billion per year, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office and the Treasury Department.”

“Allowing Congress to grant such special privileges is a bad idea. Those privileges, which are granted solely to Freddie and Fannie, crowd out other potential competitors in their market. Privately owned companies should not receive such preferred borrowing status, because it redirects investor funds into the middle- and upper-income housing market at the expense of other potential investments. Finally, the failure of either Freddie or Fannie could saddle taxpayers with a huge liability.”

Congress should immediately revoke all the benefits of government sponsorship: clearly, Freddie and Fannie can be profitable without them. Eliminating special privileges will force mortgage markets to be truly competitive and will eliminate the possibility that the current system of government sponsorship will someday lead to yet another taxpayer-funded bailout.”

Just think what difference it would make if we had a few more Republicans in the House (and Senate) actually acting like Republicans.  Well I’ll say one thing, there were many today who did, and I thank God for them.